f/2.0 center

Among the three, the Canon 35mm f/2.0 SSC offers the sharpest overall quality, followed by the Leica Summicron-R 35mm. The classic non-SSC Canon 35mm isn’t quite as sharp but has less purple fringing than the Leica. Pay attention to the horizontal lines to the left of the square and the #18. Canon SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

Canon non-SSC Thorium

f/2.8 center

At f/2.8, the classic primes sharpen up nicely. The non-SSC Canon edges past the Leica. The Sony Zeiss FE 35 triggers a different white balance when mounted on our A7R but holds its own in the center against these vintage superstars. The Angenieux zoom is the worst of the group but it genuinely is a f/2.5 at this focal length.

Canon SSC Thorium

Sony Zeiss FE 35, Autocorrect

Sony Zeiss FE 35,No corrections

Canon non-SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

Angenieux 35-70mm

f/4.0 center

Once you get to f/4.0, the Angenieux suddenly leap frogs to first place, beating these classic primes and even the latest Sony Zeiss FE 35 in the center. We’re almost splitting hairs here.

Angenieux 35-70mm

Sony Zeiss FE 35, No corrections

Sony Zeiss FE 35, Autocorrect

Canon SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

Canon non-SSC Thorium

f/5.6 center

Once you get to f/5.6, the difference get smaller and smaller, and to be frank, it’d be hard to complain about any of these lenses.

Angenieux 35-70Canon SSC Thorium

Sony Zeiss FE 35, No corrections

Sony Zeiss FE 35, Autocorrect

Canon non-SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

f/8.0 center

Once you get to f/8.0, it’s hard to see differences. You could shuffle the lenses around and it wouldn’t matter.

Canon SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

Sony Zeiss FE 35, Autocorrect

Sony Zeiss FE 35, No corrections

Angenieux 35-70

Canon non-SSC Thorium

f/2.0 lower right

It’s pretty obvious why the Canon 35mm f/2.0 developed such a reputation. Compared to the Leica Summicron-R 35mm which was a legend of its own, the Canon Thoriums do great.

Canon SSC Thorium

Canon non-SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

f/2.8 lower right

Now it makes sense why the Angenieux 35-70 goes for $1500 in mint condition. We’ll get to this later, but there’s no doubt that the French zoom lens is beating Sony’s latest and greatest 35mm prime lens in this portion of the frame.

Angenieux 35-70 (f/2.5)

Sony Zeiss FE 35, No corrections

Sony Zeiss FE 35, Autocorrect

Canon SSC Thorium

Canon non-SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

f/4.0 lower right

Now the Leica edges ahead of the non-SSC Canon 35mm f/2.8 Thorium lens.

Angenieux 35-70

Sony Zeiss FE 35, no corrections

Sony Zeiss FE 35, autocorrect

Canon SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

Canon non-SSC Thorium

f/5.6 lower right

Angenieux 35-70

Sony Zeiss FE 35, no corrections

Canon SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

Sony Zeiss FE 35, Autocorrect

Canon non-SSC Thorium

f/8.0 lower right

Angenieux 35-70

Canon SSC Thorium

Leica Summicron-R

Canon non-SSC Thorium

Sony Zeiss FE 35, no corrections

Sony Zeiss FE 35, autocorrect

f/2.0 upper right

Since the Leica is also sharper than the Canon 35 FD lenses in this location of the frame, I suspect that our FD to NEX adapter is a bit off-center.

Leica Summicron-R 2.0

Canon SSC Thorium 2.0

Canon non-SSC Thorium 2.0

f/2.8 upper right

The horrible performance of the Angenieux zoom along with the diminished performance of Canon 35mm FD lenses really suggests that our FD to NEX adapter isn’t as well designed as it feels. According to Roger Cicala and Lloyd Chambers, even differences of 5 to 10 microns can be enough to affect picture quality.

Sony Zeiss FE 35, autocorrect 2.8

Sony Zeiss FE 35, no corrections 2.8

Leica Summicron-R 2.8

Canon SSC Thorium 2.8

Canon non-SSC Thorium 2.8

Angenieux 35-70 2.5

f/4.0 upper right

Sony Zeiss FE 35, no corrections 4.0

Sony Zeiss FE 35, autocorrect 4.0

Leica Summicron-R 4.0

Canon non-SSC Thorium 4.0

Canon SSC Thorium 4.0

Angenieux 35-70 4.0

f/5.6 upper right

Sony Zeiss FE 35, no corrections 5.6

Sony Zeiss FE 35, autocorrect 5.6

Leica Summicron-R 5.6

Canon non-SSC Thorium 5.6

Canon SSC Thorium 5.6

Angenieux 35-70 5.6

f/8.0 upper right

True to our analysis above, as your stop down the classic lenses like the Leica Summicron-R, it continues to get sharper and shaper whereas the Sony FE 35mm hits a ceiling in sharpness early on.

Leica Summicron-R 8.0

Canon non-SSC Thorium 8.0

Canon SSC Thorium 8.0

Sony Zeiss FE 35, no corrections 8.0

Sony Zeiss FE 35, autocorrect 8.0

Angenieux 35-70 8.0

Conclusions

The Sony Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8 is still a great lens. It’s lightweight, sharp wide-open, and has all of the convenience of autofocus. For general photography, it’s still a good choice if you ignore the $800 price tag. That said, while center sharpness and wide-open sharpness is good at f/2.8, but landscapes you may be better off with vintage lenses. Sure, you have to deal with manual focus, but for landscapes, you’re live-view focusing anyway and taking the time to compose your shot.

Looking at three legendary classics, the Canon 35mm f/2.8 Thorium SSC, the Leica Summicron-R 35mm f/2.0 and the Angenieux 35-70mm f/2.5-3.3, it’s clear that these three lenses deserve their reputation. Even with a high-resolution 36 megapixel sensor, these three lenses are able to “hold their own” against one of the best contemporary computer designed lenses.

Leica Summicron-R 35mm f/2.0 (E55)
$975 (good) to $2500 (new-old-stock)
Keep in mind that there are multiple versions of the Leica 35mm f/2.0 lens. The last optical formula was in continuous production from 1977 to 2009. The collector’s grade ones from 2009 can be $2500 but the older lenses can still be just as good. The Serial # should be higher than 2791417. Lenses built prior to that serial number use a different optical formula.

This will be a multi part series as we find out the optimal benchmark conditions for these lenses. In this first post we tried to focus on a test pattern on an LCD screen. The goal was to look for subpixel patterns and areas of moire. We felt the advantage of the screen was that it had even illumination allowing a method of measuring transmittance of the lenses.

This is a picture of the test setup:

All Crops are 1:1 crops from the A7r, shot in Raw, exported in LR with 25/1.0/25 of sharpening

Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8
@2.8@8.0

Sony 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6
@4.0 (kit lens is wide open at 4.0 at 35mm)@8.0

Leica-R Summicron 35mm f/2
@2.0@2.8@8.0

Canon FD 35mm f/2 SSC Thorium
@2.0@2.8
@8.0

Canon nFD 20-35mm f/3.5
@3.5@8.0

Sigma 30mm f/2.8 ART
@2.8@8.0

So in conclusion…this test pattern doesn’t give us too much information other than the amount of CA wide open with the fast primes and increase in moire with stopping down. We chose to stop down to a max of f8.0 to avoid diffraction limits.

Q. What camera should I buy?
A. The Sony RX100 or Canon 1DX.

Ok, we’re being a bit facetious there. You’re going to see a lot of debate on the internet about the best camera to get, but the “best” camera isn’t close to deciding between Chevy or Ford, or Ferrari or McLaren. It’s closer to deciding between different flavors of ice cream, or iced vs. hot tea or coffee.

1. Ergonomics are important but should not be a deal breaker.

Professional photographers across the world are screaming at us right now. Alright, maybe if you’re a photojournalist covering the war with a forward-deployed and forward-engaged unit where a split-second matters or being able to make changes on the fly while bullets fly over your head and debris kicked up from mortar pelts your back, ergonomics are critical.

In reality, while it’s important that your camera is comfortable, the human brain is capable of adapting and learning. As foreign as a camera may feel the first time, or even second and third time you use it, the more you use the camera, the more you’ll be comfortable with it. So look for a camera that feels nice in your hand, and don’t worry about the rest. Don’t underestimate yourself. You’re smart and you can be proficient with any camera system.

Besides, the easiest camera to use is the one you always have with you — your cell phone.

2. Photoshop can’t fix everything.

Modern photographic software does wonders. Before long, we’ll get CSI-style “Enhance” filters. But at the end of the day, garbage in equals garbage out, and a high quality source still matters. With photography that means a good lens and a good sensor. Try taking a photo with the lens cap on — Photoshop can’t save you.

3. Don’t lose sight of the forest for the trees.

Calling someone a “pixel peeper” is a derogatory term for someone who is focused on minute and esoteric differences of photography while missing the bigger picture. While you shouldn’t accept poor quality photos, it’s important to realize that a good camera or lens is more than just the resolution on a test chart.

You should definitely pixel peep. It separates mediocre equipment from great equipment and increases the flexibility and growth of your work. You just shouldn’t do it so much that you become a pixel peeper and lose sight of what it takes to create a great picture.

Sharpness and resolution are a small part of what makes a good camera. You want the highest resolution and sharpness possible as it allows for the highest quality prints, but if you were just looking at photos on an iPad, it doesn’t matter whether you’re dealing with an 6 megapixel camera or a 36 megapixel camera.

From a technical standpoint, the important characteristics to consider are color and the ability to capture the variations in tones/tints/shades. Each lens and camera captures color and light differently and Photoshop and modern tools won’t change that.

4. You will never be able to afford the camera you want.

You have to get the best compromise whether it’s budget, size, or overall quality.

We were shooting digital when Kodak was still relevant in digital photography. Having seen camera companies rise and fall, and having taken the Xrite Online Color Test Challenge with perfect scores, we’d summarize cameras in April 2014 with the following statement:

Canon offers the most pleasing skin tones.

Sony offers more accurate colors and better dynamic range.

You don’t have to take our word for it. Our friends, Justin Lin and Pye Pirsa, who are some of the best wedding still photographers in Los Angeles/Orange County shoot on Canon equipment. The team at Iris and Light, whose work you’ve probably seen in the Ritz Carlton’s marketing materials also shoot on Canon and Red Digital Cinema.

Part of the Canon color comes from the sensor, but an equally important part comes from the lenses. Even Shane Hurlbut, ASC the Director of Photography for movies like Act of Valor, Terminator Salvation, We Are Marshall, Into the Blue, and the Game of Thrones documentary You Win or You Die, talks about the look that Canon lenses produce.

That said, Sony sensors have found their way into Nikon cameras, Hasselblad medium format cameras, and Phase One medium format cameras. This is due to Sony’s aggressive R&D into CMOS sensor technology, and from the pure metrics alone, Sony imaging sensors are the ones to beat. In 2014, Sony’s current sensor technology appears the one to beat.

So, since you’ve taken the time to read through all of this, here is our recommendation for the best cameras in April 2014.

The best pocketable point-and-shoot camera on the market today. This is where we start our recommendation. If you’re going to spend less than what it takes to get an RX100, you’re better off stick with your smartphone for a few more months until you save enough for one of these two cameras. Get a cheaper camera and you might have something better than your cellphone for a year or two, but then you’re going to want to upgrade again. Get the RX100, and even if you grow into a bigger or better camera, you’ll still be holding onto the camera. The “Mark II” version is a little bit larger but improves low-light performance a bit and adds Wi-Fi support. The original version has slightly better skin tones and is just a bit thinner.

Although the RX10 has a small-sensor compared to the APS-C cameras like the Canon EOS-60D/70D or Sony NEX-6/A6000, we actually recommend it over lower-priced entry level DSLRs like the NEX-3N and Rebel T5i. The 28-200mm f/2.8 lens is beautifully matched to the sensor and the finished output is just about on par with top-level APS-C cameras. Many individuals just looking for a great family camera for vacations will find that this the camera that will last for an entire childhood and never need to upgrade again.

With the NEX-3N or Rebel T3i, you’ll get lower quality results with the basic lens. Although there’s an opportunity to grow into the system, nearly everyone who starts off photography with one of those cameras and develops into a photographer that needs more than what the RX10 can deliver would have been better off saving up for something like an Canon EOS-70D in the first place rather than buying a temporary unit and then having to upgrade a year or two later.

Moving up into the interchangeable lens world, we’re fans of Canon and Sony technology.

Right now, Sony’s best cameras are the A7 and A7R. At the moment, the A7 offers better value while the A7R offers the highest resolution image in landscape photography. These are the best cameras for artistic photography and travel photography where have a moment to contemplate the image. Their remarkable adaptability to both modern and classic lenses makes them a highly versatile camera.

The Achilles heel of the Sony A7 and A7R comes with sports and long telephoto photography. Here, we continue to be fans of Canon EOS line. The 70D offers a robust semi-pro level of performance, while the 5D Mark III is today’s Wedding workhorse. The 1Dx is Canon’s best low-light camera and best sports camera on the market today. That said, if you’re in the market for a 1Dx, you’re probably the not the kind of reader that needs to read this post. 🙂

We know this isn’t comprehensive, and we’re not saying that fans of the Olympus OM-D E-M5 or Fuji X-T1 are going with the wrong choice. We like those cameras too. Likewise, we know that an entry level APS-C camera like the NEX-3N and Rebel T3i offer great performance at a great price and can do things that the RX100 and RX10 cannot.

Giottos Rocket Blower – This is a must have gadget. Before touching your lens or sensor with any of the other products, use the blower to remove dust, sand, grit, or anything else that can scratch your lens. We recommend the biggest one. We have been using one for about 10 years and the rubber is still holding up great. It’s also a great stocking stuffer for you camera geek friends. Even if they already have one, they could always use another.

Lenspen – These chamois and carbon dust based devices are very good at removing fingerprints. Use caution to make sure that there is no grit on surface. The built in brush is soft enough to gently brush away dust, but should only be used after the rocket blower. The lens pen for filters has a flat cleaning surface while the standard lens pen has a concave cleaning surface.

Kinetronics Tiger cloth – For even more stubborn stains, or grime that has built up over the years, we recommend a microfiber cloth with lens cleaning fluid, either eclipse fluid (pure methanol) or Formula MC. Both do not leave streaks on multicoated lenses. We like the “tiger cloth” from Kinetronics because it has the right texture, doesn’t lint or scratch. This cloth was initially designed to clean 35mm film and slides without scratching.

Welcome to the Dang Photography Blog where you’ll find our thoughts on the latest photo gear as well as some of the greatest classic photographic instruments (and toys) ever made.

Our goal here isn’t to simply cover a ginormous number of lenses but touch upon equipment that are worthy of consideration for your own personal collection.

Take a look at our Gear List for an idea of what’s coming ahead, and if you have any requests, send us a comment and we’ll do our best!

WHY OLD LENSES?

A common question is why bother with old lenses when you can have a new lens. New is better, right?

Actually not always. Today’s lens coatings are superior in terms of durability, fungus resistance, and clarity compared to old lenses, but the glass is what makes the lens.

Clarity

Older lenses were a bit toxic. Either from leaded glass or radioactivity, such as thorium. These additions to the glass increased the index of refraction and with lead, clarity. That’s why leaded crystal vases are so brilliant, and expensive. Today’s manufacturing techniques don’t allow these elements due to toxic dust that is formed during lens manufacturing. It is this vintage glass that gives the “look.”

Build

The build quality of older lenses are also superior to today’s lenses. Many were made of brass with brass bearing surfaces and helicoils. Brass is a self-lubricating metal with excellent wear characteristics when compared to aluminum. This is what gives many of the older lenses the dampened focus feel.

Simplicity

Zoom lenses were not as popular in the past because simply there were too many compromises that had to be made with their construction. This is an area where computer design has really advanced optics. But for prime lenses, the old designs aren’t a whole lot different from today’s designs. That’s why the old Zeiss lens designs (Sonnar, Distagon, Planar,Tessar) are still used today.